Research into Web 2.

0 Technologies and Learning Design: An Annotated Bibliography

Web 2.0 technologies seem to be proliferating exponentially. They are characterized as collaborative, open source, networked, and participatory as some of their significant features. These characteristics can align with contemporary views on education and learning environments which promote constructivist and social theoretical approaches. Given the alignment, it is wise to examine research in how Web 2.0 tools and the theories interconnect when designing learning environments. Although the research is limited at this stage, it is vital for sound pedagogy, effective design and accurate analysis of what the tools can do. As a citizen in a small island developing state, it is sometimes difficult at the level of schools and for individuals to access some hardware and software due to cost. Web 2.0 therefore can provide an attractive approach to developing 21st century skills and for education in general.

Bower, M., Hedberg, J. G., & Kuswara, A. (2010). A framework for Web 2.0 learning design. Educational Media International, 47(3), 177198. doi:10.1080/09523987.2010.518811 In seeking a framework for designing learning experiences using Web 2.0 technologies, the authors used taxonomies of Anderson and Krathwohl, plus constructivist and negotiated pedagogies, thereby placing their focus on the desired outcomes of the learning experience rather than the tools themselves. It then it does not matter how Web 2.0 tools evolve, the specific one which best fit the ultimate needs will be chosen. I thought this paper could be helpful to instructional designers as they make decisions aligning the types of learning and cognitive processes to the best tool best for their goals. This article aligns with other works in the field which discuss the complementary relationship of Web 2.0 tools (collaborative, participative, and allowing for synchronous or asynchronous meeting) with contemporary notions of learning (as social, situated, authentic, and negotiated). I am able to base my use and research of Web 2.0 tools on sound pedagogical footing. Seery, A. (2010). Education, the formation of self and the world of Web 2.0. London Review of Education, 8(1), 6373. doi:10.1080/14748460903557779 Traditional notions of self and identity are challenged by Web 2.0 technologies which allow for fragmented and multiple selves. As persons create multiple virtual identities in blogs, wikis and other online environments, or avatars as in Second Life, the differences between the online and real world personae can be slightly or massively significant. It is argued that such a difference can start to shape the individuals self-formation especially if the actions and motivations of the online persona are deemed more favorable than the persons reality. The norms of this public and private world of Web 2.0 technologies are in formation since some older values are overturned. Actions, decisions, thoughts are influenced by virtual exigencies, notions of privacy, surveillance and censorship lurk in the Web 2.0 sphere. If these premises are accepted, then learning environments that include creation of self through tools may need careful thought so that learning outcomes fall within the desired areas. And yet this

may be contrary the idea of authentic learning experiences where the learners are expected to construct their meaning, discarding, incorporating , and negotiating meaning based on their interactions with all elements of the learning environment. This is a philosophical examination of the role education will need to take with Web 2.0 tools since they may have a fundamental impact on how individuals see themselves, a theme echoed in several other articles examined.

Tu, C., Blocher, M., & Roberts, G. (2008). Constructs for Web 2.0 learning environments: a theatrical metaphor. Educational Media International, 45(4), 253269. doi:10.1080/09523980802588576 The article expounds that with Web 2.0 technologies there are cognitive, social, networking and integration dimensions to learning environments. Cognitively, the participants reflect, share, negotiate and self explain in their contributions to the learning context. The social dimension is about relationships, and a sense of identity, self presentation, and trust to enable sharing were aspects discussed. The network tools form the platform for learning and they are perceived and acted upon differently and depending on the context of use. Activities of the learners take place in the Integration dimension. This article repeats the concern by Seer y (2010) on the impact the multiplicity of identities can have on learning design. An area of concern to me was the appreciation shown for the collaborative filter where data is combined in a form based on previous and other users opinions. This is hailed as reflecting actuality of actions and not perceptions of what they ought to be doing. However, my concern is that this filtering will constrain new interpretations. Because I chose to act this way today, does not mean I do not wish to consider totally different responses another day. Recognizing the scarcity of foundational research to guide effective teaching with Web 2.0, this article lays out the applicability of situated cognition and distributed learning theory. Additionally, the questions posed for future research present areas for my own reflections on compensations and adjustment I may need to make in examining learning design with Web 2.0.

Gunawardena, C., Hermans, M. B., Sanchez, D., Richmond, C., Bohley, M., & Tuttle, R. (2009). A theoretical framework for building online communities of practice with social networking tools. Educational Media International, 46(1), 316. doi:10.1080/09523980802588626 The authors proposed a structure for creating a community of practice using social networking tools based around wikis, blogs, RSS feeds, social bookmarking, and other social networking technologies. Critically, this papers methodology went beyond just review of literature and analysis to action research exploring Web 2.0 technologies to reflect and co-construct knowledge by creating their community of practice. I think this strengthens the credibility of the authors thesis. They were able to validate the alignment of their theoretical underpinnings: among them situated and distributed cognition, social constructionism and constructivism. This article again reinforced the concept of multiple identities, avatars (or hybrid persona) and the overlap of virtual and real world but from the point of view of the influencing the culture within which meaning is formed. Clearly within learning design, this feature

cannot be ignored. This paper provides an excellent justification for learning design using Web2.0 technologies.

Cifuentes, L., Sharp, A., Bulu, S., Benz, M., & Stough, L. M. (2009). Developing a Web 2.0-based system with user-authored content for community use and teacher education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(4), 377398. doi:10.1007/s11423-009-9141-x This article discussed the design of a website, grounded on theories of social constructivism and distributed cognitions and employing Web 2.0 technologies. By applying the theories and technologies of Web 2.0 in an actual project, the authors were able to add to the admittedly limited research in the field, while at the same time creating guidelines that designers can use in future. The suitability of constructivist and distributed cognition theories and Web 2.0 are repeated. The success of the project depended on collaboration, participation, problem solving, and decision-making by the participants, which were more than just the designers of the web-site, but also end users and families of persons with disabilities. A wiki, as the platform, allowed instructors, users, designers, learners to consume and publish content, reflect on other contributions, ultimately constructing the meaning gleaned from the project. By developing and adjusting the design over a two year period; by involving a cross-section of participants with expertise in technology, research, and disability issues, the paper presents a credible response to the benefits of Web 2.0 technology for effective learning design.

Guldberg, K., & Mackness, J. (2009). Foundations of communities of practice: enablers and barriers to participation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(6), 528538. doi:10.1111/j.13652729.2009.00327.x As a study of experiences of participants in an online course, this article highlights enabling and constraining factors of community of practice theory in learning design. The course was based on Etienne Wengers view of community practice. Since communities of practice evolve and learning communities are structured, there are some limitations to the entire course construct to effectively create a true community of practice over the seven week duration of the course. However, there are valuable lessons to consider. The extent to which participants had a positive emotional response, understood the norms of online settings, were familiar with the technologies used, felt connected to other participants, and were able to balance the tensions of the learning environment were critical to success. For example, if the pace of the learning is perceived as not allowing enough time for reflection as opposed to activities to be completed, or there is unfamiliarity with the interface, the participants will become disengaged and remain on the periphery of the community instead of progressing to stages of greater involvement and mastery. The value of this article is cautionary, warning of potential flaws in Web 2.0 use in learning design. Provision can therefore be made to mitigate the constraints to have a better instructional design.

Merchant, G. (2011). Unravelling the social network: theory and research. Learning, Media and Technology, 37(1), 419. doi:10.1080/17439884.2011.567992 This article discusses social network theory with in which social networking sites online (SNS) should be examined. It also looks at the benefits and the limitations from an education standpoint. Social networking online adds new ways to build and maintain social interactions based on family, friendship or a range of interests. Presence, connection and community are features of social networking sites. Like other articles, this laments the paucity of research on online social networks and how it relates to social network offline. In spite of the fears about free access to online interactions, teachers ignorance versus student expertise about SNSs, and lack of sound models to use, three ways to employ SNS are given. These are learning of, learning from and learning with SNSs. This paper restrains over enthusiastic acceptance the changes in learning that SNSs and by extension Web 2.0 technologies are often touted to bring. Practitioners must consider instead what is possible and how best to achieve it.